Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
9 Black People Gunned Down at Bible Study, Obvious Hate Crime
Comments
-
I've never owned a gun. If I were going to buy a gun I would follow all laws and regulations and not kill anyone. Maybe you can tell us what laws we need that we don't have or if you're just for all out prohibition.
I'm not against regulation. I want to hear what is going to work, not just opportunism to whine about guns every time a certain race kills members of a different race. -
I've never owned a gun, only fired one a few times, and have no interest in hunting. I definitely don't love guns. I do think the right for people to protect themselves from a rogue government is important though. I'm not sure exactly where the lines should be.
-
I own several guns, only one of which is registered.
Fuck off. -
-
Who?allpurpleallgold said:
-
I like guns just fine. Use them to shoot deer every season since I was a boy with both Dads in a blind. But, this has much less to do with "loving" guns, and much more to do with believing in liberty, and the governments desire to restrict my ability to protect myself from that same government.allpurpleallgold said:The people arguing for guns always remind me of religious people. It's funny how all arguments sound the same when you've made up your mind first and come up with the argument second.
Just admit you love guns and that's all that matters.
It always amuses me that when you tell people (liberals mostly) you want guns to potentially defend yourself from jack booted government thugs, they look at you like you have two heads and are some kind of crazy domestic terrorist. Um, that is precisely what most of the guys on those bills we don't use anymore did. The redcoats were the ATF/FBI/whatever of their day. When what we now call patriots took up arms against them, because of a fundamental belief in liberty and self governance, they were committing domestic terrorism. Thank God they got to that arsenal in Lexington before the redcoats, or the revolution would have been over before it started. The limeys realized, correctly, they better steal the weapons first. The patriots realized, correctly, the only way to defend yourself in any meaningful way was to have them.
Do I think any of this happens in my lifetime? No, at least I certainly hope not. But, I believe in gun rights because I have no idea what might happen in a hundred years, and I want your great grandkids and any of my illegitimate grandkids to at least have to means to defend themselves and liberty from an overzealous government, or a common intruder, or a fucking Skynet activated robot army. Also, venison tastes good and everyone should shoot a deer and figure this out at least once in their life. -
And there's the rub. If we accept the premise that (1) people have a natural right to protect themselves form a rogue government, and that (2) the 2nd amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to establish that the government could not infringe on that right, should there even be a line? Shouldn't each individual be able to defend themselves in whatever manner they deem appropriate, up to and including the use of any degree of arms the executive's forces has at their disposal (that the individual can find a way to obtain that does not infringe on another's rights)? If you accept (1) and (2), why would your answer be anything other than "no" to the question of whether there should be a line?dnc said:I've never owned a gun, only fired one a few times, and have no interest in hunting. I definitely don't love guns. I do think the right for people to protect themselves from a rogue government is important though. I'm not sure exactly where the lines should be.
-
While this sounds nice, the Revolution wasn't won because we got to the guns at Lexington or Ticonderoga (sure it helped). It was won because of the Atlantic Ocean, time, attrition, the sagging economy of a war weary England, and the French.Swaye said:
I like guns just fine. Use them to shoot deer every season since I was a boy with both Dads in a blind. But, this has much less to do with "loving" guns, and much more to do with believing in liberty, and the governments desire to restrict my ability to protect myself from that same government.allpurpleallgold said:The people arguing for guns always remind me of religious people. It's funny how all arguments sound the same when you've made up your mind first and come up with the argument second.
Just admit you love guns and that's all that matters.
It always amuses me that when you tell people (liberals mostly) you want guns to potentially defend yourself from jack booted government thugs, they look at you like you have two heads and are some kind of crazy domestic terrorist. Um, that is precisely what most of the guys on those bills we don't use anymore did. The redcoats were the ATF/FBI/whatever of their day. When what we now call patriots took up arms against them, because of a fundamental belief in liberty and self governance, they were committing domestic terrorism. Thank God they got to that arsenal in Lexington before the redcoats, or the revolution would have been over before it started. The limeys realized, correctly, they better steal the weapons first. The patriots realized, correctly, the only way to defend yourself in any meaningful way was to have them.
Do I think any of this happens in my lifetime? No, at least I certainly hope not. But, I believe in gun rights because I have no idea what might happen in a hundred years, and I want your great grandkids and any of my illegitimate grandkids to at least have to means to defend themselves and liberty from an overzealous government, or a common intruder, or a fucking Skynet activated robot army. Also, venison tastes good and everyone should shoot a deer and figure this out at least once in their life.
But if you want to oversimplify a major historical event into a single issue, that's your right! -
Because I'm not thrilled with the idea ofBlackie said:
And there's the rub. If we accept the premise that (1) people have a natural right to protect themselves form a rogue government, and that (2) the 2nd amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to establish that the government could not infringe on that right, should there even be a line? Shouldn't each individual be able to defend themselves in whatever manner they deem appropriate, up to and including the use of any degree of arms the executive's forces has at their disposal (that the individual can find a way to obtain that does not infringe on another's rights)? If you accept (1) and (2), why would your answer be anything other than "no" to the question of whether there should be a line?dnc said:I've never owned a gun, only fired one a few times, and have no interest in hunting. I definitely don't love guns. I do think the right for people to protect themselves from a rogue government is important though. I'm not sure exactly where the lines should be.
Dylann Roofd2d having a nuclear weapon?
I understand the poont you're making, and it's a good one. I also understand there are plenty of fucked up people in this cuntry and giving them unregulated access to things that can destroy lives in a heartbeat seems unwise. There's a tension here between protection from government and protection from psychos. Hence, I'm not sure exactly where the line should be. -
But still...ThomasFremont said:
While this sounds nice, the Revolution wasn't won because we got to the guns at Lexington or Ticonderoga (sure it helped). It was won because of the Atlantic Ocean, time, attrition, the sagging economy of a war weary England, and the French.Swaye said:
I like guns just fine. Use them to shoot deer every season since I was a boy with both Dads in a blind. But, this has much less to do with "loving" guns, and much more to do with believing in liberty, and the governments desire to restrict my ability to protect myself from that same government.allpurpleallgold said:The people arguing for guns always remind me of religious people. It's funny how all arguments sound the same when you've made up your mind first and come up with the argument second.
Just admit you love guns and that's all that matters.
It always amuses me that when you tell people (liberals mostly) you want guns to potentially defend yourself from jack booted government thugs, they look at you like you have two heads and are some kind of crazy domestic terrorist. Um, that is precisely what most of the guys on those bills we don't use anymore did. The redcoats were the ATF/FBI/whatever of their day. When what we now call patriots took up arms against them, because of a fundamental belief in liberty and self governance, they were committing domestic terrorism. Thank God they got to that arsenal in Lexington before the redcoats, or the revolution would have been over before it started. The limeys realized, correctly, they better steal the weapons first. The patriots realized, correctly, the only way to defend yourself in any meaningful way was to have them.
Do I think any of this happens in my lifetime? No, at least I certainly hope not. But, I believe in gun rights because I have no idea what might happen in a hundred years, and I want your great grandkids and any of my illegitimate grandkids to at least have to means to defend themselves and liberty from an overzealous government, or a common intruder, or a fucking Skynet activated robot army. Also, venison tastes good and everyone should shoot a deer and figure this out at least once in their life.
But if you want to oversimplify a major historical event into a single issue, that's your right!
